GURMUKH SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. THE DIVISIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATS AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT, PATIALA AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgment will dispose of C. W P. Nos. 4703 to 4706 of 1986, as common questions of law and facts and involved in these cases.

(2.) The petitioners are the landowners of Amargarh Panjoli, Tehsil Sirhind, District Patiala. Gram Panchayat of the Village filed an application under section 7 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), on 20th Dec., 1984, alleging that the petitioners were in unlawful and unauthorised possession of the land in dispute, as the land was Shamlat land. While the above said application was pending before the Divisional Deputy Director of Panchayats and Rural Development, Patiala (Exercising the powers of the Collector under the Act) the petitioners filed an application under section 11 of the Act, for deciding the ownership of the land in dispute, as the petitioners claimed that they were the owners of the land and it did not vest in the Gram Panchayat. The above said Authority vide order dated 13th June, 1985 (Annexure P-1) disposed of both the applications and held that the petitioners were in possession of the land in dispute and the same was not Shamlat land and the application of the Gram Panchayat under Sec. 7 of the Act was dismissed. The appeal of the Gram Panchayat under the Act was also dismissed by the Appellate Authority on 29th Nov., 1985. Against the appellate orders passed in the four case, four separate writ petitions (C.W.Ps. 1583 to 1586 of 1986) were filed by the Gram Panchayat at, which were dismissed in limine on 1st April, 1986. Therefore, another petition under, section 11 read with Sec. 7 of.the Act, was filed by the Gram Panchayat before the Collector, Patiala (B.D. &P.O.) for eviction of the petitioners from the land in dispute and some other land. The petitioners filed the present writ petitions, challenging the action of the Gram Panchayat in filing fresh applications under Sections 11 and 7 of the Act. The argument of the learned counsel for the petitioners was that the application of the Gram Panchayat under Sec. 7 of the Act stood dismissed by the Collector earlier, which had been upheld by the Appellate Authority under the Act and the writ petition of the Gram Panchayat had also been dismissed by this Court, and, consequently, no fresh application under Sec. 11 read with Sec. 7 of the Act lay before the Collector. He further argued that section 11 application cannot be filed at the instance of the Gram Panchayat, but it can only be filed at the instance of a right-holder.

(3.) The learned counsel for the respondents submitted that by another order dated 31st May, 1984, passed by the Collector under Sec. 7 of the Act on an Application of the Gram Panchayat (Copy Annexure R-1), it had been held that Khatauni No. 31/47, Khasra Nos 13//16/1 min (2-0), 13//5(4-0), 4//16(8-0), 5//23(8-0) = 22 Kanals, had been held to be Shamlat land and this being prior in time to the decision of the Collector, dated 13th June, 1985, fresh application for ejectment would be competent at least qua these Khasra numbers.